Comments on: Prop 8 Supporters To Petition for En Banc Review http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/02/21/42246 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Sun, 19 May 2013 14:07:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Mark F. http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/02/21/42246/comment-page-1#comment-118156 Mark F. Thu, 23 Feb 2012 02:14:55 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=42246#comment-118156 My guess is that they don't get their en banc hearing. My guess is that they don’t get their en banc hearing.

]]> By: Stefan http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/02/21/42246/comment-page-1#comment-118028 Stefan Wed, 22 Feb 2012 15:34:54 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=42246#comment-118028 The exact percentage in 2010 was .24% as a matter of fact. http://www.wiggin.com/​showarticle.aspx?show=12794​ The exact percentage in 2010 was .24% as a matter of fact.

http://www.wiggin.com/​showarticle.aspx?show=12794​

]]> By: Stefan http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/02/21/42246/comment-page-1#comment-118024 Stefan Wed, 22 Feb 2012 15:28:02 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=42246#comment-118024 Remember that like under 1 percent of cases from the 9th get an en banc hearing. Let's see if they actually take it. Remember that like under 1 percent of cases from the 9th get an en banc hearing. Let’s see if they actually take it.

]]> By: tavdy79 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/02/21/42246/comment-page-1#comment-118015 tavdy79 Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:03:31 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=42246#comment-118015 This is actually good for us IMO. We've started off with a strong case, thanks to Olson & Boies, and so far each successive court ruling has made it stronger through a combination of chipping away at the arguments for upholding the ban, and rulings based on core conservative principles such as limited government. This makes it much more difficult for SCOTUS to overturn the ban, since the left wing will undoubtedly rule in our favour, while the right wing will find it difficult to overturn the existing rulings. The most recent case has also given SCOTUS's right wing a very obvious middle-way option: a narrow ruling that only affects those jurisdictions that have already legalised - CA, IA, NY, MS, CT, NH, VT, DC, WA, probably MD, and possibly NJ, ME and RI. While this wouldn't be the much-longed-for gay marriage equivalent of Lawrence-v-Texas, it would provide an extra line of protection for those gay couples who are already married. This is actually good for us IMO.

We’ve started off with a strong case, thanks to Olson & Boies, and so far each successive court ruling has made it stronger through a combination of chipping away at the arguments for upholding the ban, and rulings based on core conservative principles such as limited government. This makes it much more difficult for SCOTUS to overturn the ban, since the left wing will undoubtedly rule in our favour, while the right wing will find it difficult to overturn the existing rulings.

The most recent case has also given SCOTUS’s right wing a very obvious middle-way option: a narrow ruling that only affects those jurisdictions that have already legalised – CA, IA, NY, MS, CT, NH, VT, DC, WA, probably MD, and possibly NJ, ME and RI. While this wouldn’t be the much-longed-for gay marriage equivalent of Lawrence-v-Texas, it would provide an extra line of protection for those gay couples who are already married.

]]> By: Dustin http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/02/21/42246/comment-page-1#comment-117990 Dustin Tue, 21 Feb 2012 22:53:12 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=42246#comment-117990 At this point, doesn't it seem like they're using the appeal process to just delay the inevitable rather than actually try to get it overturned? At this point, doesn’t it seem like they’re using the appeal process to just delay the inevitable rather than actually try to get it overturned?

]]>